Re: GPL2 + required to have the place to get the recent version
Samuel Henrique dijo [Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:35:12PM +0000]:
> Hello legal,
>
> So I stumbled upon this rather interesting case of a software licensed by
> GPL2 but with an extra "clause" to it:
> "
> # If you enclose this script or parts of it in your software, it has to
> # be accompanied by the same license (see link) and the place where to get
> # the recent version of this program. Do not violate the license and if
> # you do not agree to all of these terms, do not use it in the first place.
> "
> https://github.com/drwetter/testssl.sh/blob/3b89dc6b0a41299fbf462789998e4c103f4f0210/testssl.sh#L19-L22
> (...)
> My question is regarding DFSG compliance around this, I believe there is
> nothing wrong with
> it, but the fact that upstream expose is as GPL-2 seems a little
> misleading, as it's not plain GPL-2 and I think we should change something
> in d/copyright to address this.
I'm leaving aside the question that has been picked up, regarding
whether this can be made under the GPLv2, or whether this is a
"requirement" or a "polite request"...
The requirement itself seems very similar to the "advertising clause"
in the four-clause BSD license:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/05/msg00753.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/04/msg00325.html
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/bsd.html
At that point, 4-clause BSD licenses were judged non-DFSG-free.
Greetings,
Reply to: